Makes John Kerry look increasingly prescient.

TERORISM (sic) IS A CRIMINAL PROBLEM.

The news that a team of law enforcement officials arrested four men in New York on terrorism charges is, of course, reassuring. But it's also an important reminder that we have an effective way of dealing with terrorists: old-fashioned investigatory police work. Admittedly, we have yet to learn if any of the broader surveillance powers the government has were used in this investigation, but the impression you get from reading the article is that a human intelligence source was cultivated successfully by counter-terrorism agents who then provided actionable intelligence to them. Nobody even got water boarded!

Coming on the day of, man, it hurts to type this, "dueling" national security speeches from President Obama and former Vice President Cheney, it's a reminder that we have one method of approaching the problem of terrorism that works to provide a more secure America and one that drags the country into immoral and self-defeating behaviors. Realizing that the problem of terror does not imply World War III (or IV, depending on your zaniness level) shouldn't be so hard.

I'm not sure what the statistics are on this (maybe Adam or Attackerman knows?) but it will be interesting when we eventually learn how many of the Guantanamo prisoners can't be properly tried due to controversies surrounding their capture versus those that can't be properly tried due to illegal methods used after they were captured. I imagine our problems would be a lot smaller if we hadn't been mistreating people in search of connections that weren't there. Makes John Kerry look increasingly prescient.

To be sure, there is room for military force appropriately deployed to prevent terrorists from using failed states as launching points for international attacks -- I'm thinking Afghanistan here. But it's also clear from our current entanglement there that we haven't yet figured out the overall strategy for approaching these kinds of operations and limiting them to the possible -- it's an ongoing debate.
...

when i say "we" should have had these debates, i mean politicians and the media...i know lots of u were having them
about 1 hour ago from web

was expressing an appreciation of free speech and a substantive moment for the nation - we shld have had these debates in 2001/2002 etc
about 1 hour ago from web

i'm saying that for one sec we shld appreciate that we live in a country where debating serious issues on national security is possible
about 1 hour ago from web

to say im praising a debate on whether brutal interrogation methods considered torture by the intl cmte of the red cross is unfair
about 1 hour ago from web

Not 2 be corny, but on that level, we all should all feel proud of today. Lots of places in this world where this debate is impossible.
about 1 hour ago from web

in all honesty, this is a great thing for America. a substantive debate on an important issue. Two distinct worldviews.
about 1 hour ago from web